Wat? I don't have the for reelz street fighting/MMA skills that other ppl in the thread seem to have, but breaking a nose isn't that hard to do. I have zero problem thinking that a reasonably athletic 17-year old could break a nose with one solid punch.

I realize it must be a inconceivable idea for you not to use hyperboles in argumenttion, but believe it not, refraining from using arguments that are obviously ****ing retarded (in this case concede that Trayvon isn't a highly skilled fighter) may sometimes be the more intelligent approach.

What are you talking about? I know you didn't accuse me, the same way I didn't I accuse you. I was pointing out that starting to an argument about a "team" flip-flopping is generally just derailing the current argument. On the other hand it seems like that's what this thread is all about.

If the one you're punching isn't attempting to defend himself it would be a piece of cake. I was under the assumption he would, in which case having one shot at breaking his nose will become very difficult.

Could you point to where there was any mention of him defending himself? The initial point, iirc, wasn't even about breaking his nose in itself.

b

I thought the story was that TM wasn't really throwing many punches he was trying to slam Z's head into the ground

As I understood it the question was whether Wookie could break Zimmerman's nose, if there is no defending it wouldn't be comparable. Perhaps that was only with the 10 seconds condition, I don't know and I don't really care.

It was, or so i thought also(dodger's nose actually). There was nothing said about defense. However, it was then clarified the discrepancy was about the abrasions on the head and how that could or couldn't be caused by punching someone's head into the ground. Wookie offered him

and

b

George Zimmerman's reason for calling 911 in the first place:

"This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about."

The 1972 explanation: he's on drugs or crazy

The 2012 explanation: he's talking on a cordless phone and wants privacy

What was TM doing at the time GZ called 911? Talking to a GF on a cordless cell phone. And not on drugs.

Big threat there. Need to call the cops, then follow him to make sure he doesn't get away from that nasty "talking to the GF on a cell phone" charge the cops are gonna nail him with.

I'd forgive someone who grew up in the 1970s making this mistake, but GZ is 28.

Again,

WTF w/ the concrete?

I live in a neighborhood a lot like this. In the course of a year, there are at least 100 young black men between the ages of 15-25 who walk through this neighborhood. Residents, relatives, friends, coworkers, teammates, boyfriends, salesmen, passers-through. How many robbers are there? 2? What's the odds that TM is one of the robbers even given that he's a young black man? 50:1 against? And GZ concludes that he's definitively one of "these *******s [who] always get away".

The police politely told GZ not to pursue, and he immediately agreed. Then pursued anyway.

The Neighborhood Watch handbook, which GZ had apparently not bothered to read even though he had appointed himself the Captain, says: 1) travel in pairs, 2) don't leave your car, 3) don't follow, 4) don't carry a gun.

The police and the Neighborhood Watch don't make those recommendations because they're gutless pansies, they make them because Neighborhood Watchmen are not uniformed officers, have no official capacity to act, and are not trained. Doing any of those things increase the risk to: 1) themselves, 2) innocent people who are mistakenly pursued, 3) innocent bystanders. Those recommendations are for public safety purposes.

GZ violated four of those recommendations, one of them even though the police had just asked him not do, and he had agreed.

If you go by the "reasonable man" standard that quite a bit of this stuff will be judged by when the jury considers the charges, he fails miserably. Just look at this thread. There is not one person in it (to the best of my knowledge) who has said that they would have followed TM. And many of even the most single-minded GZ supporters have quite clearly stated that they would not have followed.

He was not reasonable. He was reckless and uncaring of the danger he posed to others. His actions resulted in the death of a young man who was doing nothing wrong when GZ took those actions.

I think everyone agrees GZ was in the wrong at this part of the story

You get his Neighborhood Watch rules aren't necessarily in effect when traveling to and from the store, right?

You get that Neighborhood Watch has these rules in place for good, commonsense reasons, reasons, right? Like the whole Trayvon affair is a textbook example of why armed, untrained civvvies should stick to observing and reporting rather than going vigilante?

Lol .... wut? Really?